|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Glenn Reynolds: Hold Property Owners Liable When They Ban Guns
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"Glenn Harlan Reynolds, of Instapundit fame, was the specal lunch speaker at the National Firearms Law Seminar yesterday at the NRA Annual Meeting. Professor Reynolds gave an interesting talk derived from an article he wrote for the Tennessee Law Review last year, 'The Second Amendment as Ordinary Constitutional Law.' He covered a variety of topics, but said one thing I thought really interesting (which I hastily scrawled on my napkin, so apologies if the wording is not exact): 'If a premises owner bars me from possessing a gun on those premises, he should be liable if I suffer as a result of it, as if he had done it himself.' . . ." ... |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(4/13/2015)
|
"What's old is new" again! Some years' back I engaged in lengthy discussions of this topic, which at that time was based upon an abrupt policy change banning weapons in employee parking on the part of a major mfg in the paper industry and a workplace mass attack by a fired employee.
I posed pretty much the same question raised by Mr. Reynolds. It was not well received by those supportive of "employer rights". Nor did anyone offer any positive solution(s) to address the issue. IOW, very reminiscent of the "Gun Free Zone" issue of today. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| There are other things so clearly out of the power of Congress, that the bare recital of them is sufficient, I mean the "...rights of bearing arms for defence, or for killing game..." These things seem to have been inserted among their objections, merely to induce the ignorant to believe that Congress would have a power over such objects and to infer from their being refused a place in the Constitution, their intention to exercise that power to the oppression of the people. —ALEXANDER WHITE (1787) |
|
|
